Model Comparison
Qwen2.5 Turbo
vs. Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
Comparing 2 AI models · 11 benchmarks · Alibaba
Recommended Pick
AlQwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)8 metric winsStrongest on: Throughput, TTFT, Latency
Best Value
Qwen2.5 Turbo
100.0 value score
28.8 reasoning / $0.09/1M
Lowest Price
Qwen2.5 Turbo
$0.05/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
41.7 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
43.3 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Qwen2.5 Turbo has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Qwen2.5 Turbo is 8.0x cheaper on input tokens than Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning).
Speed gap
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) generates about 1.4x as many tokens per second as Qwen2.5 Turbo.
Reasoning gap
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) leads Qwen2.5 Turbo by 12.9 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) wins 8 measurable categories, including Throughput, TTFT, Latency, Reasoning.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Qwen2.5 Turbo
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
Alibaba
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Al Qwen2.5 Turbo | Top Pick Al Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.05/1M | $0.40/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.20/1M | $3.20/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.09/1M | $1.10/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Alibaba | Alibaba |
| Release Date | Nov 18, 2024 | Feb 24, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 113.2 tok/s | 153.8 tok/s |
| TTFT | 1064ms | 1010ms |
| Latency | 1064ms | 1010ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 11.5 |
| Reasoning Score | 28.8 | 41.7 |
| Intelligence | 6.3 | 27.6 |
| Coding | — | 43.3 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 41.0% | 82.7% |
| MMLU Pro | 63.3% | — |
| HLE | 4.2% | 14.8% |
| LiveCodeBench | 16.3% | — |
| MATH 500 | 80.5% | — |
| AIME (Original) | 12.0% | — |
| SciCode | 15.3% | 35.6% |
| LCR | — | 56.0% |
| IFBench | — | 50.8% |
| TAU-bench v2 | — | 84.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | — | 29.5% |
Key Takeaways
Qwen2.5 Turbo offers the best value at $0.05/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 41.7 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning) reaches a 43.3 coding index,making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Qwen2.5 Turbo
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
Qwen3.5 122B A10B (Non-reasoning)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
